Well you are the one talking about Viking culture Im not. There is no such thing as Viking culture so we can agree on that at least.
And since you are decending to nitpicking let me nitpick a bit more. Viking does NOT mean “Man of the bay” It means “The one who hides in the bay” (waiting for bypassers to attack) But there are a few other meanings as well. Among them the one I mentioned. Here is a link to an interesting article.
Enjoy.
http://www.hurstwic.org/history/articles/text/word_viking.htm
Even the origin of the word is debated. In the old Norse language, víkingr means a man from vík , where vík may have the sense of a bay, or the specific bay called Víkin in the south of Norway. Perhaps the name was applied because the first Viking raiders were from Víkin, or perhaps because the raiders waited in sheltered bays for their victims.
Hence “Man of the Bay”.
That would suggest that he or she was living there. Well some may have, and some dont. Its the easy way out to connect viking with the word Vik (bay), just because it has three letters in common. But, there are at least three other meanings that are just as likely. Among them the feminine word Viking that means long jurney. And in those days traveling across the North sea or the Baltic sea for that matter was a long jurney indeed.
If war is a warriors job, there were no warriors in all of western civilization starting from the fall of Rome until around the 1700s as standing armies didn’t exist. War was fought mostly between regular peasants with some training. The closest thing other than mercenaries to that definatition of warrior would be maybe knights and even for them war was a rare past time and many never saw a battlefield in their life.
Why are people quoting wikipedia here? I could literally go into wikipedia and input that shield Maidens made up the majority of viking armies and copy paste it here, doesn’t make it true. While it’s not proven viking women fought in battle it is generally considered likely but not definitive. If women did fight against Christian’s it would’ve been surpressed by the church as it would bring shame to Christians being terrorized by pagan women.
On the contrary, there were way more Warriors, since most wars were conducted by large Mercenaries armies, and Mercenaries would travel all around the continent and even outside of it, to continue their business of War.
Also, a lot of Knights were true Warriors, to the point that Kings were forced to start wars just so they could gain honour in combat, or risk constant uprisings from people whose whole life was preparing for War, and did not take Peace easily.
In fact, the more advanced any society gets, the less Warriors there are in them, and their positions are replaced by Soldiers, who prepare for War but actually hope for Peace.
A Warrior like a Knight, a Mercenary, a Keshik or a Samurai always wants to be in a constant state of warfare, since that is his livelyhood.
Standing armies actually go against the ideals of a Warrior, since they are there to end Wars effectively.
Warriors love the Chaos and opportunity of constant conflict.
I can’t speak for keshik, but at least for knights and samurai, war wasn’t how the made a living. They earned their livelihoods from farming or taxes depending on their station. It was very rare for knights to go to war, In mist countries it would only happen a couple times in their liftime, and almost never would all the knights of a realm be called to arms, if they did any fighting at all it would be in tournaments or against highwaymen. Or they might spend some time in the guard of some city before retiring to their estates.
The whole notion of women fighting alongside men is a form of modern feminism.I hhighly doubt anyone had a whole army of woman for very simple reasons,how would a society survive without a majority of females?
In 1848 the british killed all men above 18 to crush a freedom fight in sri lanka,did the sinhaleese population die out?just think if they did the same to all the woman,same reason why you should not use females in war.
Nun. It can not convert, only heal, but it only costs 30 gold
Why was this flagged? Was it because he used the expresions moron and sexist pig? Other than that, i think his arguments make sense.
haha its ok man, its ok for him to be sexist , but its not ok to confront him 
ill edit it as soon as it lets me…
A “mameluke” throwing a giant sword while riding on a camel is more realistic than a female warrior?
25 elephants on the same transport is more historically accurate than a female warrior?
are you one of those peeps who thinks women can’t learn to fight? Or build muscular bodies? They should work in the kitchen only?
be honest now, is this about realism or some warped idea that women can’t be soldiers? you should watch the cross fit games if you think the idea of a female viking warrior is unrealistic… those grrls will rek you
Unless the Female Warrior is a Scythian Horse Acher, it is!
Even though my Hollywood comment was tongue in cheek, I think people get a false sense about the real physiological differences between men and women, which is probably in big parts due to the display of female combat capabilities in popculture, where slender women kick big bulky dudes flying in the air and whatnot.
Just look at Sports, where there are huge performance gaps between male and female athletes.
And there are mental differences on top of it, like men being more aggressive, stoic, less risk averse and so on.
To deny that is denying basic biology and psychology.
What boggles my mind is how feminists always try to convince themselves and others how women are just as well equipped for tasks men have evolved to do. How a womans “strength” is measured in how well she adopts masculine traits and displays masculine behavior instead of valueing femininity and female behavior in its own rights.
Sure women could be soldiers, but they would underperform to an army of male soldiers. In the current luxury of a late stage empire that is the modern western world, we can afford to waste excess efficiency for ideological purposes, but you couldn’t when running a medieval empire.
Its not like the women were just chilling, they did work that needed to be done as well and if you have the choice, why not let both sexes do what they evolved to do and excel at?
btw. I didn’t flag your post and don’t approve of flagging at all, even if the post is just you having your panties in a bunch because someone contested your holy ideology.
Men are just better at being men, get over it.
And then you get female sports absolutely dominated bi trans-women.
Because having a lot of testosterone for the beggining years of your life really does make you that much more resilient.
Not only so, but the huge technological advantages of modern combat made the gender gap in physical performance much more equal.
Technology has always been the Great Equalizer, and has done wonders in all aspects of culture and civilization building.
This was not so for the majority of Human History, where raw physical might and willingness to kill and die for the sense of Honour, was what made effective military traditions.
Even with all the tech available today, War is still massively masculine based, on a frontline and field operations level.
The Israeli army is the most feminized army in the world (most amount of female combatants) and even the isrtaeli soldier-girls say military life is harder on women than on men, because of female biology and evolutionary behaviour patterns.
There are many female characters to possibly add… Look at rise of kingdom by Lilith
There’s Aethelfaud …arthemisia… Cleopatra…
Seondeok…tomyris… And wu zetian who all have a great back story.
You are far too polite to give reason and logical arguments to the table here. Clearly this person is not interested in reasoned argumentation but only to enforce an extreme ideology by casting slurs on those who disagree.
Arthemisia is a myth, and many of those are not Medieval.
They were not asking for women Heroes (or Leaders) which we do have quite a few examples. Instead they ask for female mass troops, which is a fantasy concept, because War was almost solely the domain of Men.
We are talking about a time with no contraceptives, and in which death by childbirth was commonplace here!
I don’t think people are arguing that there were female mass armies in medeival times, but that there were some females that fought. That said a female unit just feels like a sellout to the feminist movement. At best you could throw in something like having monks/berserks have female variants like villagers to represent nuns/shield Maidens (which while not definitively a thing, is highly possible to have existed, sadly written records of Norseman are very unreliable).
Possibly just make a skin mod for some units that might make sense kinda like the lunar new year or winter skins.
Since we like quoting wiki here apparently here’s an excerpt from the women in the crusades article:
A number of women took the cross and battled the Muslims, some with their husbands, some without; numerous royal women fought as Crusaders, and at least one against them. The six most prominent examples of these warriors are given below, the most famous of which is Eleanor of Aquitaine.